This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
08/07/2018 12:00 AMAt a special meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) on July 30, the commission unanimously voted to adopt a proposed zoning change that would significantly affect efforts to build a waste recycling plant on Route 145.
The new regulation prohibits “Commercial or industrial solid waste, construction or demolition debris disposal, recycling, material transfer, or outdoor storage of materials not associated with a retail or contractor business.”
The meeting was attended by a much larger crowd than most PZC meetings due to the impact the zoning change could have on a proposed recycling plant that could be built on Route 145.
In spring 2018, an application by Shoreline Rail & Recycling (SRR) to build a waste recycling plant drew intense public opposition. The proposed facility would have been 94,500 square feet and built on the site of a former Unilever warehouse on Route 145. According to George Andrews of Louriero Engineering Associates, a company that had represented SRR in front of the Inland Wetlands Commission (IWC), the proposed facility would have been for storing waste comprised of “construction and demolition debris.”
SRR decided to withdraw its application in May, after several member of the IWC indicated they were leaning toward voting “No” on the application at the commission’s next meeting. However, earlier last month, SRR submitted a new application before the IWC.
At the PZC meeting on July 30, PZC Chairman Michael Rossi said he did not know if the fact that the commission approved the zoning change would affect the latest SRR application since the application was filed before the change was approved.
At three public hearings on the SRR proposal, residents cited concerns about the potential impacts on shell fishing, what some argued were inadequate flood management plans, possible contamination to the wetlands, and fire risks. The application had drawn the attention of two intervenors, Demco, LLC, and Herb Clark, who retained Attorney Campbell Hudson to fight the SRR application.
The intervenors also presented their own experts to share their opinions of potential impacts to the wetlands and potential health problems to the people in surrounding areas. At all three public hearings, no member of the public spoke in favor of the application.
At a PZC public hearing on the proposed change, Thomas Cronan, a lawyer retained by SRR, questioning the PZC. Cronan submitted a letter to be read into the record that contained several questions to the PZC about when the commission came up with the proposed change, if any members of the commission had contact with members of the Board of Selectmen, and other questions. The PZC read the letter into the record, but chose not to respond to the questions.
Several times during Cronan’s time to speak, the crowd had to be admonished by the PZC as people booed or yelled.
Rossi said earlier in the spring he asked John Guszkowski, the town’s consultant planner, to draft the zoning changes because he felt the use category wasn’t defined in the current regulations. Cronan implied that an appeal of the PZC decision by his client was possible.